| But as you engaged people, even through your trip, but now also too as exploring whether to run for governor, what is on people's minds and what are they talking about?
I think the thing I realized when I talked to people was that they really feel there is a crisis in leadership in this state and that what has happened is that Texas politics has evolved over the last eight years into a debate on how it will play in the Republican Primary. The Republican primary is still a very narrow primary--- it doesn't have a lot of people voting in it. I think what the statewide candidates in particular have worried about, and House candidates too, is how their actions are going to be perceived in the Republican primary. As a result of that I think they come back with these hard Right answers so often. I think that our politics and the challenges that we face are much more difficult than the simplistic answers that are being offered.
I really didn't start thinking about running for governor seriously until last fall. But prior to that, even when I was Ambassador to Australia, I realized that foreigners' perceptions of Texas and what we believe Texas is all about are very different. Foreigners tend to believe that Texas is all about J.R. Ewing and the old Dallas television series, and that Texas is just that kind of place and it is not. That can be frustrating. But when I went up to Asia and became Ambassador to Japan and I was so much closer to the situation in both Koreas, China, and India, I realized that the center of gravity in the international community is moving to Asia. When you see what is happening in China and India in particular you become concerned about whether Texas is going to be competitive as a result of it. What I've begun to worry about in Texas is that we don't have an educational system that is preparing kids to compete globally. A kid entering the first grade in Texas next year will have to compete in twenty or thirty years with the kids entering the first grade in China and India and, I worry they aren't going to be able to do that.
When you look at Texas and realize that we have Hispanic kids, African American kids that have dropout rates upwards of 40-50%, then you know we have a problem. Those kids are not going to be able to compete in the global economy that is developing and that already exists. The global economy is a knowledge-based economy. If our kids don't have knowledge and skills then there aren't going to be any jobs for them. What you will wind up with is a workforce or citizenry that are tax consumers, not tax payers, and that is not good for anybody. Not good for labor, not good for business, and not good for Texans.
So basically in your conversations with people you're hearing, and through your background and experience you are seeing, that education is an area that needs focus, and that your campaign is centering on?
Absolutely. It's a two-pronged thing. It is education and the effect that the lack of education will have in a global economy. A lot of times Governor Perry will talk about creating a "good business climate." I believe in creating a good business climate. I have more business experience than Senator Hutchison and Governor Perry combined. I know what it is to borrow money and pay it back, I know what it is to create jobs and to meet payroll.
Your experience is obviously something you are bringing to this exploration for governor...
Yes, but let me say this about the business climate: it's not one-sided. The second side of the same coin is our educational system. It is a global, knowledge based economy. If we don't have a workforce that is capable of doing the jobs being created today then no business is going to want to move here. They are going to have to have educated citizens to do the work. If we don't have that it doesn't matter how low the business taxes are - they aren't going to come here because they aren't going to find anyone here to do the work. No one is speaking to that. I believe the more people I talk with the more people I believe are willing to listen to a political dialogue that is different. There is a constituency for the kind of candidacy I would have.
What background and experience do you feel you bring to a Democratic Primary?
I think the message we just talked about and my experience as a diplomat. When you look at what is happening in the world we are competing against the Chinese, the Indians, the Japanese, the Australians, whatever, because that is what the world is. But when you look at issues along the Border, it's not just a question of putting up a wall, which I believe would be a disaster, but it's understanding that Mexico has to prosper, that jobs have to be in Mexico before we can solve the immigration crisis. You can't wall off Texas to the rest of Mexico or the rest of the world. You see the violence along the Mexican side of the border that is spilling over onto our side of the border.
When I was down in the Valley and spent the night with my friend Cullen Looney, his family has lived in the Valley forever. His father was the County Judge in Hidalgo County before Lloyd Bentsen was County Judge. So that is how long they have been down there and they don't go across the border anymore. Not because they don't want to, but because it is too dangerous.
When we were in El Paso the news that night was that 50 people had been killed in Juarez in the last two days. 50 people. Then you find out that 1,300 people in the last year have been killed in Juarez in gang-style killings and you realize this is a very serious problem with very serious consequences. If it is not addressed than it is going to get worse.
Ok, I'm a student, a hard working Texan, and activist in the Democratic Party, give me three reasons why Todd Hill should vote for Tom Schieffer in a Democratic Primary?
I can win. And winning the governor's office is a game changer in Texas politics. I think that my politics and my profile can bring people back to the Democratic Party that hasn't voted there in a while. I think I can raise money in places that other Democrats can't. When you look at the last election and you analyze where Obama lost and won, he carried four out of the five largest urban areas, but he didn't carry Tarrant County. Well I'm from Tarrant County, and the neighborhood education that I got and my brother got make us hometown boys made good. I think it gives me credibility to get votes here in Tarrant County that no other Democrat can get. In the next five largest counties - which are suburban counties compared to the big five - Obama did substantially better than Kerry did in the last election. He particularly did well with higher-educated, higher income voters in those suburban areas. I think that is a natural constituency for the kind of emphasis on education and general policies that I'm advocating. In the thirty counties that had a Hispanic majority Obama beat McCain 2 to1. I think I can do that well or better. In the last 214 counties he lost badly and while he won the Hispanic counties 2 to 1, he lost the rural counties 3 and 4 to 1. I think I can do substantially better than that.
You think you can do well in rural counties? Where a Democrat hasn't performed well in many cycles?
I can, and...
You intend to run a more suburban, rural strategy versus strictly urban?
Yes. Mark White has told me that, Pete Laney has told me that. These are guys that used to run quite well in rural counties. I think I can do that. I also think I can put together a winning combination that Democrats haven't had in a while.
What experience do you bring to the Democratic Primary from your legislative days?
Well, I've kind of done it all. Having been in the legislature at a young age I think I learned the ropes. Also while I was going to undergraduate and graduate school I worked in the legislature. So I've kind of been on both sides. I worked through three sessions and became a permanent staffer. I worked in Governor Connally's office and then got elected to the legislature at age 25. I think that overall experience of being around the legislature for almost eleven years would be an enormous benefit to me.
Then I think getting out and being an attorney and in business gave me a different perspective. When I was with the Ranger's and built the Ballpark or was in charge of building the Ballpark in Arlington, a very complex project that was built on budget and on time. It was a public-private-partnership that we did with the City of Arlington which was applauded by almost everyone. We wanted to go to the electorate and not try and do it at the city council level alone because we thought if we had the backing of the electorate we'd have a successful project. So we laid it out to folks, we had an election, and more people voted in that Special Election than had voted in the Democratic and Republican primaries combined. We got 65% of the vote. That's the highest percentage that anyone in the country has ever gotten on a project like that. Then what we did was under-promise and over-deliver.
I think people were very pleased with what happened. It became a generator of jobs in the community, it increased economic activity around the ballpark, and I think everyone would say today that it was a winner for everybody. It's that ability to sit down and bring people together that I think is an asset I've demonstrated over and over again. Then to be an ambassador to two different countries with two very different cultures and to have a successful tenure in both places I think demonstrates the breadth of experience I have had.
It was with your work with the Texas Rangers that you first got to know George W. Bush. You supported him when he ran for governor. You were an ambassador during his administration. Is there something about George W. Bush that you think we don't know? Or you think we ought to know about him that perhaps the rest of us just don't know?
Well I've always been frustrated that the George W. Bush I know and that I've seen in private has never gotten across to the American people. I think that is unfortunate. But this is not an election about his administration or about the past but about the future. George Bush asked me to serve my country and I tried to do that. I told him at the time that I would be honored to serve the country but that I didn't want to be a Republican. He said that's fine. I'm not asking you to serve the Republican Party I'm asking you to serve your country.
I think there's something interesting about that, too. Already the Obama administration has asked me to do two different projects, which I've agreed to do. I hope that what that signifies is that I have a reputation for being somebody who has good judgment and is competent to help.
So then would you say perhaps that you were more loyal to state and nation versus George W. Bush?
George Bush is a friend of mine. He was a friend of mine before he became Governor and before he became President. He will be a friend afterwards, too. But George Bush and I don't have the same politics, particularly on domestic issues, and I wasn't involved on the domestic side of things. People ask me all the time would I have done everything the same way that he did them. No, of course not. No two people would ever do things exactly the same way. But he has been a friend and I do give strong consideration to friendship over politics.
In your announcement on March 2nd, you commented when asked who you voted for in the presidential election that you had voted for Obama because you felt, quote "he had the intellectual capacity to change America. That our politics had become too partisan." That his brand of politics appealed to you. You had mentioned earlier that perhaps the policies of the past shouldn't dictate what happens in the future. But weren't the politics you voted for this time a repudiation of the politics and policies of the last eight years of George W. Bush as president and six years of George W. Bush as governor?
Well I don't know if I'd reach back to his time as Governor but I don't think there is any question that people wanted a change and they voted for change. I think it was more than just change. I think it was a desire to move beyond this hard partisanship that doesn't give anyone else any breathing room. "You are either a Democrat or Republican." I think it is not what the country really wants and I don't think that that is what it has to be all about. I understand the business about playing to the base. That certainly has been something that people have done on both sides, but I don't think that is where people want to be. I think they want us to look at problems and come up with solutions. They are willing to accept that from thoughtful and serious people from both sides of the aisle.
I understand that, and certainly I agree with your sentiments, but wouldn't you say that policies of the past, whether Bush or Perry as governor, and Bush as president, have magnified the problems we face today?
I think Perry's policies...I think what you have here is the deterioration of the political climate in Texas...
By the way, did you vote for Rick Perry?
No, George Bush is the only Republican I ever voted for.
So you never voted for John Cornyn or Kay Bailey Hutchison?
No.
But what you had when George Bush was governor, and I'm not going to grade Bush on being Governor or being President or whatever, but there was a different atmosphere when Bob Bullock was Lt. Governor, Pete Laney was Speaker, and George W. Bush was Governor. They would meet together. They wouldn't let anyone else in the room. They all had a respect for each other. They recognized they worked different sides of the street to get where they were. They all thought the other one had a love of Texas in them and wanted to do something for Texas. We have lost that completely. And you've seen a hardening of partisanship. Unfortunately, I think everyone had hoped that President Bush could take that bi-partisanship that we experienced in Texas to Washington. Instead the partisanship of Washington came to Texas. That hasn't been good for anybody.
What I have realized when I have talked to people now is that it's this narrowness of the Republican Primary and desire to not allow anyone to get to the right of you that has driven our politics to the edge of a flat earth. We don't want to fall off that edge, and I'm afraid that is what we are about to do.
Interesting. Let's talk about Perry a little bit more and some of the issues on the plate right now. Most recently he waffled back and forth on whether to accept federal stimulus dollars. He has decided not to accept the funds for unemployment benefits and essentially declined to replenish the benefit fund all together. Do you agree with that decision? Would you have made a different decision than Perry?
Absolutely. This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. There is no logic to this.
Rejecting those funds would result in an eventual tax on small businesses, would it not?
Exactly. Because what you have when you have high unemployment is a situation that drains the unemployment insurance fund. The idea that he would deplete that fund, and not use funds that include money from the taxpayers of 49 other states to replenish it, makes no sense. Because what's going to happen at that point in time is that you're going to have to put the money back in there and the only taxpayers that will be doing that are Texans. This is ultimately going to end up in higher taxes for Texans too, because he doesn't want to take the money from Washington. He wants to get up there and rail against Washington and rail against Democrats, and say you can't tell us how to run Texas, you can't tell Texas businesses how to operate...it is just silliness.
Machismo getting in the way, you think?
I don't know what it is, but I think what it is more than anything else is red meat to the Republican base. Now, he talks about the situation that this is going to increase taxes on Texans because we don't pay part-time workers that are seeking unemployment benefits, that the legislature has debated it and they aren't going to do it. Well here is a novel idea: take the money right now and when the federal dollars run out have the debate again in the legislature and change it back if you want so that there will be no impact on future Texas taxes.
Or you can call a special session in the meantime to address it...
Right, and change the laws. This is totally a fallacious argument. We don't have to have it cost Texans anymore unless we choose to.
And in the meantime we have a lot of Texans on unemployment benefits...
That are hurting, which is the very purpose of the stimulus package. To try and get those people back in the game.
Purchasing goods and services...
Exactly. To jump start the economy.
This just doesn't make logical, fiscal sense...
It's not logical. It's not thought through. It's all political in order to have the political record that makes you sound more conservative than your opponent in the Republican primary. And Senator Hutchison didn't vote for that stimulus package and is not exactly in a position to criticize Perry because she turned down the whole thing. That's the point of what I'm saying here. This makes no sense to me. It makes no sense to me to have a Children's Health Insurance Program that can be reimbursed almost a billion dollars for and we don't take it because we want to be able to make a speech about how conservative we are in Texas. Meanwhile those kids that aren't getting those benefits aren't worried about liberals or conservatives or a Democratic or Republican Primary - they are worried about getting asthma and getting treated. His decision is unbelievable to me.
Let's talk about Transportation, another issue, especially in North Texas, that people are concerned about. We obviously need infrastructure and I don't think anyone would argue against that point; however, in Austin, under Perry's leadership, we've seen a public-private-partnership toll scheme emerge to build infrastructure we can't live without, while foreign entities own the rights and revenue to tolls collected. Do you see the outrage? And the second part of that -our federal stimulus dollars are going to fund "shovel ready" projects that include this toll approach...
Yeah, now that "shovel ready" project in Houston will be completed with toll roads but the toll authority has the money there. This is just another one of those things that doesn't make sense to me. We can build free roads with that stimulus money just as easily as we can find out how to build toll roads.
Right, so do you feel there should be more scrutiny on how those federal dollars are being used for transportation projects? Because, for example, the North Tarrant Express Plan in Northeast Tarrant County it's the same thing. The rights to manage are owned by Cintra and our federal stimulus dollars are going to go to finish that project, which contains more toll capacity than free lane capacity.
That's right, yes. I believe in public-private-partnerships, but the public part of it has to be negotiated from the standpoint of what is best for the public. If there is no benefit to the public then there should be no partnership. I don't on the face of it say that toll roads are a bad thing, but toll roads ought to be a last resort and not a first choice. If you can't get the road built any other way than you build it with a toll road. We did that right here in the Dallas/Fort Worth area...
With I-30 between Dallas and Fort Worth...
The point of the Dallas/Fort Worth Turnpike was to build a road between Dallas and Fort Worth, you issue bonds, and when the bonds are paid off it becomes a freeway. The thing that bothers me about these deals that have been put together lately is that they are not only talking about building toll roads they are talking about denying access to free roads in the future. We are making commitments that the state won't do this and won't do that if the private company will just build a toll road, but the person driving has no choice but to take the toll road. You know in Japan they have toll roads all over the country, and the American kids that were living at the Embassy, they went to an American school located outside the city. On Saturdays when the parents of the kids wanted to go to the soccer games, the kids' basketball and baseball games, it would cost $52 in tolls to go back and forth. That's the kind of effect badly managed transportation policy can have on people's lives.
I get back to the fact that toll roads should not be the first choice. They should be the last choice. Toll roads in effect can be a case of double taxation. You get taxed on the gasoline side of it and you get taxed for use of the road.
So you advocate more scrutiny?
Absolutely. We need to get our priorities right.
Let's talk about college tuition. Someone like myself who attends the University of Texas at Arlington and every semester my tuition goes up. You talked about higher education being a key to allowing Texas to be competitive. Are we not pricing people like me, and other Texans, out of a college education?
Absolutely
What do we do to fix it?
We stop it. You're putting emphasis in the wrong place. It's another situation where you are advocating responsibility so that you can express political rhetoric. We don't want it to be harder for young people to go to college at a time when they have less earning power. We want them to earn more. We want them to be bigger taxpayers. If we deny them the ability to go to school or make it harder for them to go to school they can't acquire the skills they need in the future. What has happened in recent history is because you didn't want to put general state funds into higher education and do the right thing, then you pushed it off to the Board or Regents so that you could say that you didn't have anything to do with it. Then you push the problem on the only constituency you can tax which is the students. That's absolutely the wrong way to do it.
Education and higher education in particular generate new jobs and new wealth in the state. You don't put that on the backs of the people who are least able to afford it. You give them the opportunity to go to school and acquire the skills that are going to make them creators of wealth and opportunity for others in the future. It's kind of a no-brainer to me.
Yes, it is very difficult on college students right now and it is only getting worse and more expensive.
Exactly. It's again the ability to shift responsibility to someone else and say I didn't have anything to do with it. This is not what you want. It's not good public policy.
One more issue I wanted to talk to you about is utility costs. It's an issue facing every day Texans, every single day. Deregulation hasn't worked for us. So what do you see as the problem around escalating utility costs and what is the solution?
There are two issues there. One is the issue of regulation and...well, there are three issues: regulation, energy, and the environment. They all kind of meld together. I don't like regulation. If you can do without regulation I'd like for free markets to do the best they can. The analogy I'd use is one from baseball. If you have a major league baseball game with two major league teams you could not have a game without umpires. The two teams would cheat and there would be people--not all the players, but some of the players--that would cheat if you didn't have anyone enforcing the rules. You'd wind up with a game that was no game. You wouldn't be able to say whether a player was out in a close play at first base. It's just as simple as that. You have to have umpires on the field. They have to have integrity. They have to be the ones that are protecting the integrity of the game. It's the same thing with regulation. The government has to be the honest broker on regulation. It has to ensure the game can be played. If the umpires get carried away with themselves and think they are the game then they can ruin the game, too. The best kind of umpire is the one that is there ensuring the integrity of the game and that the spirit of the rules are being carried out. That's what the government ought to be. It ought to be the entity that is ensuring that the honest business and that the honest worker is being protected, because there is no one under greater threat than that honest person. We have to have regulation, and it has to be light and fair.
On the issue of electric rates per se, you've got a changing market place with regard to the price of energy. People talk about fossil fuels and talk about the need to find alternative energy and they are right. We have to explore alternative energy, but we need those fossil fuels as well. Alternative energy and fossil fuel energy must be environmentally sound. We have to have things like clean coal. We have to have things like nuclear power. We have to have things like fossil fuels in the mix because our energy needs are such that they are going to continue and grow and it has to be affordable to people. It can't be just charge whatever you can and get whatever you can. It has to be something that has a long-term strategy that works.
Can you identify some legislation in Austin right now that you feel will begin to address this issue?
Well I don't know about particular legislation, but I know that you have to have a situation that keeps energy prices as low as possible, provide for an opportunity for growth in the sector because we're going to need to address energy needs, and we have to develop future energy needs in this state than we have before. It's a big challenge, but again it is something that we don't need political rhetoric on it we need someone to look at it in a thoughtful and serious way and I'm not sure that is being done.
Mr. Schieffer, do you feel we have a widespread voter fraud issue in Texas?
No. I think that Republicans have spent all this money trying to uncover voter fraud and they haven't. I worry that the Voter ID Bill that has been proposed in Austin is really just a sham to try and discourage people from voting. That's not what we ought to be about. We ought to try and get people to vote and encourage people to vote. People say, well, you have to show ID when you board an airplane, you have to show ID when you cash a check, but there are a lot of people in Texas who don't fly, and there are a lot of people in Texas who don't have checking accounts. They have a right to vote. That is what democracy is all about. You don't want to keep those people away. You don't want when they come to the polling place for them to feel like they shouldn't be there. We need to encourage people to be there. We need to encourage people to vote. We need to have campaigns that discuss things and let them decide the outcome. But let's not have one side or the other put their thumb on the scale in order to predict the outcome based on discouraging people from voting.
You're obviously moving forward with your exploratory committee now, so what type of infrastructure are you putting around you, what type of vision internally do you see for your campaign?
I've been talking to a lot of people, but we are trying to put the nuts and bolts together to run a statewide campaign. Running a statewide campaign is a great undertaking. It requires a lot of people and a lot of work. So what I'm trying to do in this period of time while I'm traveling and talking to people is also interviewing consultants and all that. But I'm a big believer in what I call civilian control...
Grassroots campaigning?
I think you have to have everything, but I think you have to have people that are not having a financial gain in mind and in charge of the campaign. If you don't do that then you end up with a bunch of people blowing or burning up your money that they put in their pocket and you don't ever reach out to the public. I think if I'm going to be successful in this it's got to be a crusade. It can't be a campaign. If people don't embrace the thought of making a real change in the political dialogue in Texas then I'm not going to get elected. They have to believe that this needs to be done and that they want to do it. I think if I can do that then I have a really good chance. That means that you have to have real people, not just political professional consultants involved in the campaign, and to run the campaign.
So you've got Jack and Jill Texan out there, Democratic activists, dyed in the wool Democrats, most likely "yella dawg." How do you convince them that Tom Schieffer is the guy to not only be their nominee in the Democratic primary, but also to be their governor?
They need to have a seat at the table and I don't think they have a seat at the table right now. I hope that I can give a voice to people that they feel have not had a voice in a long time. I think I can do that. I think the experience I have of bringing people together and management experience, and leadership experience, and the other positions that I've occupied could give them some hope that I can do that. I think that people want to change this state. I think that they haven't given up on it. I think they are very frustrated because they think that no one has a chance to do it - that oh, Texas is a Republican state and a Democrat doesn't have a chance to win. In talking with people there is a hunger for someone to deal with the difficult problems, our challenging problems in a thoughtful and sensible way. I hope I can be that kind of candidate and that people can come to believe that what I'm talking about is something I believe in and that I can be effective. If they do then I have a chance. If they feel I'm just another guy on an ego trip then I'll lose.
Earlier I asked you if there was something about the former president that we don't know, or that you think perhaps we ought to know. Is there something about Tom Schieffer that you want us to know, or that perhaps you think we ought to know?
I hope that people think I'm a man of my word. I hope that they know that I love Texas. I don't mean that in a trite or a cliché way. I believe in Texas. I love Texas. I want people to have the same opportunity twenty years from now that I had when I was growing up. It gets back to that first kid in the family that graduates from college-it changed everything in our lives, not just my brothers, but in our whole family. When you cross that threshold it never goes back to what it was. That's what I want kids that are born in Texas to have. I don't want that Hispanic kid to think that the deck is stacked against him. I don't want that African American kid to think that the deck is stacked against him. I don't want that kid that is in that blue-collared, Anglo neighborhood to think that he doesn't have a chance - that the American Dream is not for me but for someone else.
My mother always said to me, my brother, and my sister that "you don't let anyone tell you that you don't belong, and don't let anyone tell you that you can't do it."
I look at a lot of these kids coming up in poor neighborhoods and all that - and I hear people say under their breath or under the radar that they aren't up to it, they aren't smart enough, or this, or that - it's just like prejudice.
When I go out to an aircraft carrier of the United States Navy and you watch these jets come in and take off, you see how complicated the whole process is. The very same kids coming from those same neighborhoods are well trained and in charge of billions of dollars in property. They get them in and get them out. They are as smart as can be, they aren't dumb. The military has figured out a way to educate young men and women with highly technical skills to operate these things and it's just a question if we have the political will to do it. We have to rid ourselves of this preconceived notion that this kid or that kid, and because of where they are born or because of their last name, can't do it.
Mr. Schieffer, once more I want to thank you for your time today. It has been a pleasure having this conversation and for you to invite me into your home. I wish you the best of luck.
Thank you, Todd. It was my pleasure. I'll see you again at the Mid-Cities Democrats meeting next Thursday. |
